Black holes are not science fiction. They exist we know they exist and we have evidence they exist! As stated below they are the birthing place for dark matter.
hhhh it seems that titor was right ( Quantum gravity takes singularity out of black holes )
- Thread starter titor.10
- Start date
Black holes are not science fiction. They exist we know they exist and we have evidence they exist! As stated below they are the birthing place for dark matter.
If black holes are science fiction then explain dark matter? Explain why in some areas researched thus far in known space where scientists and astrologers have researched such as the "milky way" why they believe blacks holes to exist. Explain then why the expansion of space seems to expand much further from these theorized locations of black holes and how any known object in space near or beyond the point of speculative space that includes the theory of a dark gravitational vortex appears to be much further then should be and is recorded as such by astrologers.
The key to what John is saying here is that his unit is a "temporal displacement unit" displacement being the key. Displacement of what? Displacement not of time but space? Perhaps time and space being one in the same or do we say its separated and defy what we know to be true? His machine doesn't defy the law of special relativity. His machine merely bends space and time opening a portal to another dimension and alternate universe. Its not a time machine! It's actually more like a star gate unit! A transportable warp device opening a gate way. I invite engineers to look at his schematics a little closer. Some stuff been overlooked and its not in whats written. Look closely at the open schematics of the unit, enlarge it if you have the ability to do so. Look closely at the coil mechanisms and ask yourself what technology that looks similar to. We have all seen it before. Its as clear as day what it is! I won't spoil the surprise. Also look closely at the vault to the left side of the unit. I believe this is a hub that allowed john to keep his horizon open that's just a theory. Perhaps an emitter of sorts. To difficult to tell with the blurred image. The miniature particle accelerator is fascinating. If truly functional as he claimed his device would be able to emit tremendous power to open a singularity in fact as he stated two singularities. The gravitational machinery within the unit no doubt kept them stationary. Yes i invite scientist and engineers to look closely at the open schematics. The proof is within the image. Nothing like it has ever been seen but perhaps at CERN the answers lay in place there.
Einstein
Dimensional Traveler
I have a different speculative approach that solves both the black hole problem and the accelerated expansion of the universe problem.
There is one mathematical computation that shows there doesn't appear to be enough mass in the universe. Like a large portion of the necessary mass for the universe to exist appears to be missing.
It has been stated that on the other side of the event horizon of a black hole, time effectively comes to a stop. Right there no one seems to have noticed time no longer flows. All that matter that formed the black hole in the first place is no longer moving in time along with the rest of the universe. And a simple fact becomes apparent. No force can exist without the flow of time. So no gravity can exist any longer after the creation of the black hole. What I'm saying is that the black hole after the instant of formation, stops moving in time along with the rest of the universe. It's frozen, stopped in time, or standing still at that point in time of its creation. Kind of like all that matter left our universe.
So each time a very large star goes supernova and then collapses into a black hole. The gravitational effect of all that matter no longer moves in time, and no longer has an effect on the rest of the universe. So the universe is losing mass this way. Because all that mass stopped moving in time while the rest of the universe continued its forward motion though time.
So the supply of mass in the universe is decreasing. This alone could be the explanation for the accelerated expansion of the universe. No dark matter theory is needed.
Ill attempt to counter your speculation with a speculation of my own, we know that quantum physics dictates a 4th 5th 6th and in fact a infinity of dimensions. Space exists and at its core is the original driving force which is dark matter this doesn't dismiss your hypothesis doesn't support it as well. Dark matter is whats pushing matter further away from orbits and stars and heavenly bodies alike. Within each dimension of space accumulates and expands through what we can not see which is an endless set of ripples of dark-matter thus pushing outward for an infinity of time expanding the known universe and unknown universes alike. Giving birth to new black holes as old stars die and forever expanding dark matter. Within time our very own earth shall be much further away from our sun theoretically to the point that our planet becomes enveloped into a void of space and in darkness. Only question is will our sun go nova before this happens or after. I theorize after for i believe as dark matter is the driving force within space everything has a purpose and plays a part. As planets and planetoids remove themselves from orbit near stars the power that the star has demolishes and starts to die. Dark matter is behind the momentum that pushes the heavenly bodies apart from one another. Dark matter originates from dark vortex that are in fact black holes thus this is a repeating cycle and never ends. Space is infinity. Dark space is the speculative god particle thus having no beginning and no end. I do not submit to the big bang theory in fact i dispute it. I suggest that there is infinity big bangs that give birth to new universes, new galaxies and new stars. This could be as one person outlined, White holes, Birthing place for matter and energy not yet seen by our astrologers or misunderstood. Time and space are in fact one in the same with no end. Time and space can be bent and manipulated but can not be altered out of existence. This is my theory and my theory alone. Can not be dismissed sense space has no beginning nor an end. Within space is dark matter.
Einstein
Dimensional Traveler
That is about the only thing you said that I agree with. Infinity doesn't exist in our universe. So that's off the table.
I kind of look at the universe as in a constant state of evolution.
Possibly at one point in the past there were more dimensions present than there are today. String theorists would like that. The extra dimensions are turning off one by one. And I don't know if you noticed but my speculation on the behavior of a black hole shows the dimension of time being turned off. What's left over is a 3 dimensional object devoid of motion through time.
Jcpo
Chrono Cadet
I did not read all the posts but don't forget one thing, excess of anything creates it's opposite.
With that assertion I can easily imagine black and white holes.
Well to me they are excess of matter.
Black is a excess in negative form, white the positive one.
Black is matter collapsing on itself.
White is energy explosion as suns.
Much more we are far from big bang much more there will be black. To one moment everything is just black and then big bang again. Too many matter created energy.
With that assertion I can easily imagine black and white holes.
Well to me they are excess of matter.
Black is a excess in negative form, white the positive one.
Black is matter collapsing on itself.
White is energy explosion as suns.
Much more we are far from big bang much more there will be black. To one moment everything is just black and then big bang again. Too many matter created energy.
Einstein
Dimensional Traveler
I don't have a degree.
I just have an alternate explanation for what is going on, using the same available facts. The simplicity of the explanation provides its own credibility. I mean take a look at the existing facts. A guy named Karl Schwarzschild invents the math for the existence of what traditionally has always been called a Schwarzschild discontinuity. Now they are called black holes. But that pretty much covers all the existing facts we have on black holes. Looks like none, zero facts. Just someones fanciful notion that a math equation can predict something that is real, before the fact of its existence has been confirmed. And at the rate the science community is progressing with plans for interstellar travel, I would also speculate that definitive proof of black holes wont be had for another 10,000 years. So anything you read on the confirmation of black holes is merely just speculative assertions on astronomical data that more than likely has an alternate explanation.
I would encourage you to look for the facts in any article claiming confirmation of black holes. You'll be surprised at how hilarious some of these articles are.
I just started watching "Big Bang Theory". That show is just as hilarious as modern physics. Sheldon is going for a Nobel. I know I would award him one. Just for showing us all what physics is all about. LOL......
John Thomas
Temporal Navigator
There is a black hole at the center of every galaxy.
At one stage, a black hole pulls many things in.
At another stage a black hole shoots out jets of plasma.
In other words, over a long period of time, black holes ebb, and then much later, they flow like a tide.
At one stage, a black hole pulls many things in.
At another stage a black hole shoots out jets of plasma.
In other words, over a long period of time, black holes ebb, and then much later, they flow like a tide.
John Thomas
Temporal Navigator
Einstein, photographic proof.
A Black Hole Devouring A Star Is One Hell Of An Amazing View | Gizmodo Australia
Before you continue joking about me playing at being a time traveller, you need to stop playing at being an astronomer.
I like the ongoing topic we are having of black holes and i like how we can agree to disagree and keep the conversation civil. The space science community as a whole has agreed that black holes are real! For one to choose and say they are not real despite what the majority may say is no different then some one saying god is real and others who would say he is not real. Personal choice, personal opinion. I for one believe black holes are real and believe science supports the evidence that they are real. I also believe in god! With that said it come down to what the individual believes in! Perhaps not enough evidence has been made available to persuade Einstein to believe the way most of us do. Perhaps there shall never be enough to ever convince him or her that black holes are real. I could hold up a card say its red, it looks red, it is seen as red by most but for some reason this person off to my left thinks its orange. What most of us don't know is that this individual is colored blind and truly can not see it as a red card. Nothing wrong with this person, they just don't see colors as you and i and most people do. However with that said i can't force this person to see the card as being red! It's a personal choice to believe its red by my word and others or choose to believe what is seen with his or hers own eyes and gut feeling. Time travel, black holes and dark matter, no matter what the subject is an altered opinion sooner or later will be shared by someone. So lets all agree to disagree and have fun keeping the conversation alive. I feel there a lot smart people here and no one theory is wrong nor right just theories of interest in clearly a topic we are all very interested in.
Jcpo
Chrono Cadet
Einstein you can't say there are no facts. Here is the science opinion summary :
The first Black hole observation were Cygnus X1, 1965. They say now they clearly identified it...
Quasar are QUAsi-Stellar Astronomical Radiosource. The consensus is that they are the compact extreme lighting region around a supermassive black hole at the center of a massive galaxy.
The white holes are speculative, they describe it as the opposite of a black hole.
As you can't get out of a black hole (can be called the future as you can't go back in time), you won't be able to stay or get in in a white hole (can be called the past).
The limits of these singularities are called horizons. And while one is repulsive the other one is attractive.
The problem in the Schwarzschild white hole theory is that the configuration is supposed to be static and we do not know black hole otherway than by massive stars implosion. It does not exist in eternity so the white hole could not exist.
But this position is to me really strange.
It means there is no physical process able to explain it's formation. But you know black holes so why couldn't this be the origin of whites ?
Also they say Quasar are acceleration discs so they can't be whites holes.
But Quasar origins are often young stars and they deliver a lot of energy
The first Black hole observation were Cygnus X1, 1965. They say now they clearly identified it...
Quasar are QUAsi-Stellar Astronomical Radiosource. The consensus is that they are the compact extreme lighting region around a supermassive black hole at the center of a massive galaxy.
The white holes are speculative, they describe it as the opposite of a black hole.
As you can't get out of a black hole (can be called the future as you can't go back in time), you won't be able to stay or get in in a white hole (can be called the past).
The limits of these singularities are called horizons. And while one is repulsive the other one is attractive.
The problem in the Schwarzschild white hole theory is that the configuration is supposed to be static and we do not know black hole otherway than by massive stars implosion. It does not exist in eternity so the white hole could not exist.
But this position is to me really strange.
It means there is no physical process able to explain it's formation. But you know black holes so why couldn't this be the origin of whites ?
Also they say Quasar are acceleration discs so they can't be whites holes.
But Quasar origins are often young stars and they deliver a lot of energy
Einstein
Dimensional Traveler
Einstein you can't say there are no facts. Here is the science opinion summary :
The first Black hole observation were Cygnus X1, 1965. They say now they clearly identified it...
Quasar are QUAsi-Stellar Astronomical Radiosource. The consensus is that they are the compact extreme lighting region around a supermassive black hole at the center of a massive galaxy.
The white holes are speculative, they describe it as the opposite of a black hole.
As you can't get out of a black hole (can be called the future as you can't go back in time), you won't be able to stay or get in in a white hole (can be called the past).
The limits of these singularities are called horizons. And while one is repulsive the other one is attractive.
The problem in the Schwarzschild white hole theory is that the configuration is supposed to be static and we do not know black hole otherway than by massive stars implosion. It does not exist in eternity so the white hole could not exist.
But this position is to me really strange.
It means there is no physical process able to explain it's formation. But you know black holes so why couldn't this be the origin of whites ?
Also they say Quasar are acceleration discs so they can't be whites holes.
But Quasar origins are often young stars and they deliver a lot of energy
I think the whole problem boils down to belief systems. Is it something real and verifiable? Or is it something non tangible? To me that is the difference between reality and fiction. But it appears to me that the distinction between reality and fiction has become so blurry, no one appears to be able to tell the difference anymore. In fact I almost suspect the difference between the two is no longer taught in schools.
What bothers me is that belief systems are fine for religion or moral values. But belief systems don't really have a place in the scientific community. Yet somehow the fiction writers have gotten their feet in the door of science. The creation of the theory concept is similar to a religious belief.
I pointed out that the sole basis for a black hole is based on Karl Schwarzschild's equation. And since then a whole bunch of additional mathematicians have gotten on the black hole bandwagon. I have yet to see anyone mathematically turn a black hole into a white hole. But that will probably be next. But everything we know and are told about black holes has been created by mathematicians on paper. Is that supposed to add credibility for the existence of black holes? Maybe the mathematicians have God's cellphone number.
Jcpo
Chrono Cadet
You must believe in something to make it true. That is the basics. What makes a theory real is a demonstration so the maths are the best way to do it. Your point is quite right indeed Maths are the way to god. 22/7 is somewhat it's voice mail...
But behind the theories are facts and observations.
The density of stars in the center of the Milky Way is so big that special techniques of imaging as the Adaptive Optics are necessary to increase the resolution of the VLT, thanks to which astronomers were able to follow with an unequaled precision the journey of several stars around the Galactic Center. Their trajectories betray unquestionably the gravitational influence of a great massive black hole, an equal mass about three million suns. The observations of the VLT also revealed, at regular intervals, infrared flashes of lightning from this region. Even if the exact cause of this phenomenon remains still unknown, it could mean that the black hole turns very quickly on itself. " The life of a black hole is not a long quiet river".
The astronomers use the VLT to scrutinize the center of the other galaxies and also discover there the undeniable tracks of super-massive black holes. In the active galaxy NGC 1097, they observed in detail a complex network of strands winding in spiral towards the center of the galaxy. It is maybe the first detailed view of the routing of matter, from the main part of the galaxy up to the central core.
...
And I though about this... doesn't the white hole theory coincide with the matter definition itself ?
But behind the theories are facts and observations.
The density of stars in the center of the Milky Way is so big that special techniques of imaging as the Adaptive Optics are necessary to increase the resolution of the VLT, thanks to which astronomers were able to follow with an unequaled precision the journey of several stars around the Galactic Center. Their trajectories betray unquestionably the gravitational influence of a great massive black hole, an equal mass about three million suns. The observations of the VLT also revealed, at regular intervals, infrared flashes of lightning from this region. Even if the exact cause of this phenomenon remains still unknown, it could mean that the black hole turns very quickly on itself. " The life of a black hole is not a long quiet river".
The astronomers use the VLT to scrutinize the center of the other galaxies and also discover there the undeniable tracks of super-massive black holes. In the active galaxy NGC 1097, they observed in detail a complex network of strands winding in spiral towards the center of the galaxy. It is maybe the first detailed view of the routing of matter, from the main part of the galaxy up to the central core.
...
And I though about this... doesn't the white hole theory coincide with the matter definition itself ?
Einstein
Dimensional Traveler
That is where I disagree. I don't believe that a belief in something makes it real. And you can prove this to yourself as well. Sit down and believe that you have a million dollars in your bank account. I'll just bet that doesn't come true.
Now you are right that behind theories are facts and observations. But in this scenario, the facts and observations came first.
That doesn't seem to be the case with black holes. The theory came first without any facts or observations. And all the existing observations could have other explanations. So I do suspect we are being lied to. But why? I think the answer to why may actually be in the observations. But as long as we don't believe what we see, and believe what we are told, the lie becomes successful.
The fact is, there is no white hole theory. The scientific community really doesn't have any ongoing theories for the continued creation of matter. They believe the amount of matter and energy in the universe is fixed, or constant in nature.
Darby
Epochal Historian
The key is to actually read the phrase in English.
"Displacement" as used in physics is defined as the magnitude of a vector. "Temporal" refers to time. If he meant space he would have used the term "spatial displacement".
Darby
Epochal Historian
Mathematics is the language of physical science, but it is not the physics itself. The best way to demonstrate a scientific theory is a direct physical experiment. When only math is used, such as in string theory, it is given as an approximation that tends to prove the theory. It is only used when a physical experiment is either impossible (there are no black holes in our neighborhood therefore math proofs and indirect experiments are all that is possible) or impractical (for example, a trivial truth is to be proven but far too expensive for an actual lab experiment).
The actual physical laws of our universe are not subject to democracy, philosophy or debate. They are what they are; they are the reality that we were dealt and do not change based on whether or not one or more people believe them to be fact. The only debate is over proposed theories proffered in furtherance of discovering them.
Jcpo
Chrono Cadet
Well so try to demonstrate me the same thing without believing it, you should be embarrassed to lie !
Good maths make good demonstration, even more than physical experiment because it can give exact values that are not subject to the accuracy of the instrument used.
But bad maths leads nowhere and that is where we are.
Take a look at how ancient were thinking mathematically and I'm sure you would be disappointed a value can be visible, vertical, horizontal, invisible, and that is changing the meaning of the whole demonstration because it implies another dimension of mathematics, the fractal real one.
Einstein, "The fact is, there is no white hole theory. The scientific community really doesn't have any ongoing theories for the continued creation of matter. They believe the amount of matter and energy in the universe is fixed, or constant in nature." I agree with this but that not what they call a white or a black hole, they never talked about creation or destruction of matter. They just talk about some specific magnetic regions.
White hole - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good maths make good demonstration, even more than physical experiment because it can give exact values that are not subject to the accuracy of the instrument used.
But bad maths leads nowhere and that is where we are.
Take a look at how ancient were thinking mathematically and I'm sure you would be disappointed a value can be visible, vertical, horizontal, invisible, and that is changing the meaning of the whole demonstration because it implies another dimension of mathematics, the fractal real one.
Einstein, "The fact is, there is no white hole theory. The scientific community really doesn't have any ongoing theories for the continued creation of matter. They believe the amount of matter and energy in the universe is fixed, or constant in nature." I agree with this but that not what they call a white or a black hole, they never talked about creation or destruction of matter. They just talk about some specific magnetic regions.
White hole - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
John Thomas
Temporal Navigator
Displacement is the difference in direction and length magnitude between 2 or more vectors?
Divergence is the difference in direction and magnitude between 2 temporal vectors?
We need to invent more terms for our temporal engineering.
Let' say that if the divergence between the original temporal vector and the alternate temporal vector is greater than 3% from the original starting point, also where 360 degrees represents 100%, that the alternate vector will no longer influence the original vector.
Divergence is the difference in direction and magnitude between 2 temporal vectors?
We need to invent more terms for our temporal engineering.
Let' say that if the divergence between the original temporal vector and the alternate temporal vector is greater than 3% from the original starting point, also where 360 degrees represents 100%, that the alternate vector will no longer influence the original vector.
